2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

Can’t believe someone is defending the what the Flames have done the past 15 years or so. Someone posted that one stat weren’t the flames bottom 3 or something since 05-06 in terms of playoff success?

At the end of the day the goal is to win the cup. Well the flames goal should be get into the second round. But now the goal is make the playoffs. I believe Treliving is gonna go all out here because he knows he could be out of a job by Christmas if they come out slow out of the gate or they miss the playoffs.

Yeah, I'm baffled by somebody digging in so hard defending the Flames track record. I get defending them from some of the over the top criticism of things they can't control, but the bottom line is they haven't done nearly enough things right for a very, very, very long time.

I will say that while winning the Cup is most definitely the ultimate goal, the more realistic and achievable goal should be to build a legitimate contender. If you've done things right, and build a legit contender you have a way better chance of winning that Cup, but it will never be guaranteed.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

Can’t believe someone is defending the what the Flames have done the past 15 years or so.

That's because I'm not. I have explained till I'm blue in the face what I actually am doing, but people who want the Flames to be THUH WORST TEAM IN THUH HISTORY OF EVARR have to make up stupid motives to attribute to me.

At the end of the day the goal is to win the cup.

That's what fans tell themselves. At the end of the day, the goal is to make money. In recent years, that means not pissing away in operating losses what you get in capital gains. So the real goal is to break even, which is why so many owners are fixated on making the playoffs and reluctant to allow rebuilds.

I would say it sucks that you're stuck cheering for one of the teams that never had the draft luck to do a full-scale rebuild. Except you're not stuck, and you're not cheering. You're choosing to hang around and boo. Apparently this gives you some kind of jollies.

[genetic_phreek]

Laine would be a great fit with the Flames. He was amazing with Aho which shot up his stock. Lindy plays a similar game.

Sign me up.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by genetic_phreek

Laine would be a great fit with the Flames. He was amazing with Aho which shot up his stock. Lindy plays a similar game.

Sign me up.

Aho?

When did Laine play with Aho?

Oh, was it the worlds?

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by genetic_phreek

Laine would be a great fit with the Flames. He was amazing with Aho which shot up his stock. Lindy plays a similar game.

Sign me up.

I feel like this could be an opportunity to add an elite goalscorer below market cost. This Garey Busey looking mother ####er has 150 goals in 351 games (a 35 goal pace) while barely trying. If you could get Laine engaged for a whole season, he could compete for the rocket

[kukkudo]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That's because I'm not. I have explained till I'm blue in the face what I actually am doing, but people who want the Flames to be THUH WORST TEAM IN THUH HISTORY OF EVARR have to make up stupid motives to attribute to me.



That's what fans tell themselves. At the end of the day, the goal is to make money. In recent years, that means not pissing away in operating losses what you get in capital gains. So the real goal is to break even, which is why so many owners are fixated on making the playoffs and reluctant to allow rebuilds.

I would say it sucks that you're stuck cheering for one of the teams that never had the draft luck to do a full-scale rebuild. Except you're not stuck, and you're not cheering. You're choosing to hang around and boo. Apparently this gives you some kind of jollies.

Time to log off and take a break dude. It’s reality not some fairy tale made up story here that the Flames have been crap for years. At the end of the day all CP Flames fans old and new posters all want the Flames to succeed. Lots of people are frustrated with how things have gone and some keep on drinking the kool aid like the fans up north. It’s part of the game!

[genetic_phreek]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Aho?

When did Laine play with Aho?

Oh, was it the worlds?

World Juniors. He had success his first few years in Winnipeg but he's never really played with a true two way player there.

Ovechkin is a phenomenal player but you look at him with Backstrom vs without and I think there's an argument to be made with Laine

[868904]

Laine with a two way centre like Lindholm and an elite playmaking winger in a Gaudreau could be a dynamic first line.

Put “3M” back together for the second line and that’s a potent top 6.

Get some size and speed for the bottom 6 with some Sutter magic and you might have something.

Get Sutter to tell Laine everyday how much he reminds him of Iggy.

[simonsays]

IMO a successful season has the team either winning a banner (06 Sutter / 19 Peters) or winning a round (15 Hartley). You can have good years where you win neither, but to me that's the measuring stick. So we've had 3 successful years since the salary cap.



Back to topic, if Laine is available we have to look into that. Especially if there can be a swap starting with Monahan. I'm not on the hate train for Sean, but if Lindy is going to play #1C, and Backlund keeps performing like a #2 C (and he does) I don't see where Monahan fits on this team. Plus Columbus is aching for centers worse than we are. Contract would be an issue.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by 868904

Laine with a two way centre like Lindholm and an elite playmaking winger in a Gaudreau could be a dynamic first line.

Put “3M” back together for the second line and that’s a potent top 6.

Get some size and speed for the bottom 6 with some Sutter magic and you might have something.

Get Sutter to tell Laine everyday how much he reminds him of Iggy.

That is kind of intriguing. Laine and Torts didn’t mesh too well though.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is kind of intriguing. Laine and Torts didn’t mesh too well though.

Can't hurt to kick the tires... always a bit of a concern with players with that kind of talent being traded more than once though.

[CASe333]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

https://www.si.com/hockey/news/past-...out-the-decade

Hockey news has us 21st over the last decade in Dec 2019 - Colorado, Winnipeg would easily have past us after last season. Carolina arguably. Same with Toronto. So going by hockey news after last season we would have ranked somewhere between 24/25. Very close to my bottom 5 statement (It's over past 10 years not 15, but it's not like the 5 years before that helped us out)


But you didn't acctually quote a ranking. You made up a non-sensical rating and then I guess quoted yourself. It wasn't even a algorithm or something that took multiple factors into play.

You literally have said playoff success means nothing to you, so you rank the Flames 17th based on their regular season play. And then said we are jinxed and that's the reason we haven't had playoff success.

It's nonsensical. There is nothing left to argue because you are now quoting yourself as a supporting argument for yourself and resorting to jinxes to defend the team.

You must realize how far this argument has gone off base for you...

When you take into account season ranking and playoff series wins I am very confident Calgary is not in the bottom 5 of the league since year 2000 or whatever years you want to cherry pick. Looking at the article you quoted Toronto and Carolina do not even come close to moving past Calgary given their (imo dumb) metrics. Meanwhile using their metrics Detroit falls fast. Calgary probably drops to 22-23 range with that particular metric (they takes into account personnel trophies??)

Columbus, Florida, Edmonton, Winnipeg(Atlanta), Phoenix, and Buffalo all rank well below Calgary's success for the last 20 years pretty much no matter what metric you use.

Looking back at Jay Random's argument he is not trying to say Calgary has been a good franchise or even better than mediocre. The argument I keep seeing lately is Calgary "is one of the worst" or a "terrible" nhl franchise and I think he is just pointing out by all available metrics we are below average but no where near the worst. Calgary has enjoyed similar success as Toronto but unlike Toronto they have won a cup in the last 40 years. None of the Canadian teams really should be happy with the trajectory of their franchises for the last 30 years (except maybe Montreal since they have at least won in the last 30 years and just went to the Finals).

Anyways I am just tired of the hyperbole. We all should demand better but fans don't need to overreact to media rumours or exaggerate how bad things have been. I think we all want the same end result so no point in hyperbole.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by CASe333

When you take into account season ranking and playoff series wins I am very confident Calgary is not in the bottom 5 of the league since year 2000 or whatever years you want to cherry pick. Looking at the article you quoted Toronto and Carolina do not even come close to moving past Calgary given their (imo dumb) metrics. Meanwhile using their metrics Detroit falls fast. Calgary probably drops to 22-23 range with that particular metric (they takes into account personnel trophies??)

Columbus, Florida, Edmonton, Winnipeg(Atlanta), Phoenix, and Buffalo all rank well below Calgary's success for the last 20 years pretty much no matter what metric you use.

Looking back at Jay Random's argument he is not trying to say Calgary has been a good franchise or even better than mediocre. The argument I keep seeing lately is Calgary "is one of the worst" or a "terrible" nhl franchise and I think he is just pointing out by all available metrics we are below average but no where near the worst. Calgary has enjoyed similar success as Toronto but unlike Toronto they have won a cup in the last 40 years. None of the Canadian teams really should be happy with the trajectory of their franchises for the last 30 years (except maybe Montreal since they have at least won in the last 30 years and just went to the Finals).

Anyways I am just tired of the hyperbole. We all should demand better but fans don't need to overreact to media rumours or exaggerate how bad things have been. I think we all want the same end result so no point in hyperbole.

You found 6 teams out of 31 that are worse by your own opinion. So if we take your selection of teams as accurate (and I have no issue with any of them but could argue a few are on par with the Flames) you are correct- The flames are not in the bottom 5 worst franchises! We are #7! Start the parade!

That mean 80% of teams are better then the Calgary Flames using your own selection.

To me that means we are one of the worst. This isn't a hyperbole. If you don't think being in the bottom 20% of teams makes you one of the worst I guess we have different expectations!

Unless you define being the 25th worst team in the NHL as "Not Terrible"

[Tkachukwagon]

How does this Flames team stack up against 20 years of Flames teams? Who knows but here is some more TRADE SPECULATION AND RUMOURS.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1417317373661618180

[Sandman]

If Laine couldn't get along with Torts or Maurice, he'll really hate Sutter. I would pass.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon

How does this Flames team stack up against 20 years of Flames teams? Who knows but here is some more TRADE SPECULATION AND RUMOURS.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1417317373661618180

4 assets - 2 nhl players, 2 top prospects and/or first round picks

So not far off in thinking Tkachuk, Dube, Zary and a first.

I wonder if Monahan, Mangiapane, Zary and a first would pull it off.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by MrMike

4 assets - 2 nhl players, 2 top prospects and/or first round picks

So not far off in thinking Tkachuk, Dube, Zary and a first.

I wonder if Monahan, Mangiapane, Zary and a first would pull it off.

If tkachuk is included, I think giving up Dube, Zary and a 1st as well is way too much. He’s a better current NHL player than any other team would give up. Maybe just tkachuk + 1st round pick + Dube but even that is a huge offer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MrMike]

I agree. If there’s any way of not giving up Tkachuk, Gaudreau or Lindholm I pretty much give them whatever they’re asking for.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by stemit14

If tkachuk is included, I think giving up Dube, Zary and a 1st as well is way too much. He’s a better current NHL player than any other team would give up. Maybe just tkachuk + 1st round pick + Dube but even that is a huge offer.

Have to agree. Based on that criteria, Mangianpane/Monahan/Poirier/1st.

The fact that they are still wanting no surgery (generally telling Eichel to play in pain for the rest of his career) or waiting for another team to make the call on surgery to appease the player, lowers the price substantially.

I wouldn't give up Dube/Zary/Pelletier/Tkachuk for a player that has been so mismanaged. The fact that there has been no movement at that price, would say that's not an unreasonable train of thought.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is kind of intriguing. Laine and Torts didn’t mesh too well though.

Torts hated Duclair too but look how he fit with Q in Florida.